Author
Topic: Upgrade advice: 6D or 5D2/3? (Read 14178 times)

Okay, so I know there's been a lot of topics like this recently but I believe that advice might differ from one person to another. So here goes...

First of all, I would like to emphasize that photography is strictly a hobby (although it does come in handy with my image processing research from time to time). My previous system was a 60D with the following lenses: EF-S 15-85, EF 50/1.4, Tamron 70-300 VC USD. The body and the 15-85 lens have already been sold to facilitate the move to FF.

For my type of photography, I enjoy doing landscapes, macro (although I use an extension tube for budget reasons), portraits (still subjects mostly... and my pet dogs!), and general travel photography.

So here's the thing. I understand that the 5D3 is by far superior in terms of AF functionality. With my 60D, I've had no problems dealing with focus though. Sure, I have a hard time tracking my running dogs and focusing spot on when there's fast motion but is that really just the difference? To give you an idea of what I've shot, here's some samples:

On the other hand, the 6D has the WiFi functionality and low light focusing capability as well as UHS-I support for much less. So, so far I'm leaning towards that. It seems to have a similar AF as the 60D and even the controls! Before anyone says anything, I find the remote control/monitoring capability of the 60D (with a USB cable and my Nexus 7 tablet) great especially for my research work.

Finally, there's the good ol' 5D2. Is there really any reason to go for it instead of the 6D? Again I'll say this before anyone complains, I know there have been little reviews on the 6D but most seem to say that the AF system works fast so that might be good for me. So lets just work with what we know at least?

I think you may be about 3 weeks early if asking for opinions on the 6D. I certainly can't provide you with expert advice, but I think at this point nobody else can, either.

(Nice photos, BTW.)

Thanks!

It's not really about the opinions on the camera I suppose. Maybe I should put it more concisely... Purely from a specification point of view, is there any benefit of getting the 61-pt AF vs 11-pt AF for my use? Plus other features into consideration of course.

Also, the 6D will be released early-mid December which if you include shipping (I'm not anywhere where pre-orders are available) would be just in time for the holidays. So I think I have to jump into the pre-order wagon if I'm to have the slightest chance of getting it on time.

I think you may be about 3 weeks early if asking for opinions on the 6D. I certainly can't provide you with expert advice, but I think at this point nobody else can, either.

(Nice photos, BTW.)

Thanks!

It's not really about the opinions on the camera I suppose. Maybe I should put it more concisely... Purely from a specification point of view, is there any benefit of getting the 61-pt AF vs 11-pt AF for my use? Plus other features into consideration of course.

Despite some of the speculation here, I don't think anyone really knows how the AF on this camera is going to perform based on specs alone. Personally, I'm waiting for some in-depth reviews before I take the plunge.

*edit- sorry, I'm really not being helpful here. Probably someone else like Neuroanatomist could explain the technical advantage a 61pt system might hold over an un-tested 11 point system.

« Last Edit: November 15, 2012, 11:10:51 AM by wellfedCanuck »

Logged

Don't take my advice. Don't even take my advice not to take my advice.

Despite some of the speculation here, I don't think anyone really knows how the AF on this camera is going to perform based on specs alone. Personally, I'm waiting for some in-depth reviews before I take the plunge.

*edit- sorry, I'm really not being helpful here. Probably someone else like Neuroanatomist could explain the technical advantage a 61pt system might hold over an un-tested 11 point system.

Yep, that's the same dilemma I have. No worries though, just looking for opinions. And yeah, technical advantages would be great.

Pending reviews it is all guessing, but it is unfortunate if you really must purchase in time for the holidays.

First off, the 5D2 might be as good or better for less money; we don't know.

Also, you would be buying a camera when it first comes out. It will definitely come down in price a few hundred bucks within 6 months of its release. Plus, you never know if it will have some bug, and need some high-tech aerospace duct tape retrofitted inside.

Borealis

I had a chance to try out the 6D at a photo expo a little while ago. In terms of AF, I found the difference between the 5D3 and 6D is that the former is much more effective when tracking a subject, because of the higher density of points as well as the multiple cross-type sensors distributed throughout the array. Also, when using the outer points on the 6D, it hunted a fair bit before locking focus. Obviously this is all anecdotal evidence and should be taken with a grain of salt.

From what you describe about your typical subjects, I suspect that the benefits of the 5D3 would be a nice bonus but not critical.

First off, the 5D2 might be as good or better for less money; we don't know.

... but the 6d will most probably have less banding than the 5d2, and Chuck Westfall predicted that the 6d has even better high iso than the 5d3. I think both is very probable, or Canon wouldn't get away with the 11pt af system.

For my type of photography, I enjoy doing landscapes, macro (although I use an extension tube for budget reasons), portraits (still subjects mostly... and my pet dogs!), and general travel photography.

I'd be very surprised if the 6d af wouldn't do for that, esp. if you are even somewhat ok with the mediocre tracking of the 60d. The 6d will have larger af points and better low-light capability, but for macro this probably means more inconsistent af than with the smaller points of the 5d3: for difficult spots like the small eye of an animal that is looking towards the camera, my 60d often doesn't hit the exact spot I want it to simply the af point is so large.

My upgrade path has been 7D, 5D Mk 2, and finally 5D Mk 3. My brother owns a 60D and I have used it a few times.

It really sounds like from what you describe the 6D would be the way to go based on your current needs. If you think the extra speed and AF performance of the Mk 3 could come in handy at some point, it might be worth it to wait for another $2900-ish deal to come along. The Mk 2 is a good camera, but you never really mentioned a cost concern, so I would say the newer feature set of the 6D would outweigh the cost savings. The smaller size of the 6D is probably nice too. Of course since you sold your 60D already, finding a Mk 2 would get you back in the game sooner.

If cost is not a concern, 5D3 would be great. I got one and I love it. 6D is going to be new and will have its own teething problems. Having said all that from what you describe, any one of the three you mention would work for you.

I have the same considerations at hand as the release date of the 6D approaches.

This is how I aproached the dilema:

For me the 5DIII answer is simple (assuming that money IS a consideration). It is as such a performance orientated machine built from the input of many a professional, that the mere fact that you are "wondering" about this camera means it is probably more than what you need. In general, I think you will know that you need a 5DIII and thus not consider any other class.

5DII is old. I know a lot of people say that it is still a great camera, and it probably is, but I just can't look past that fact. It is difficult for me to believe that the 6D will not be better than the 5DII as an overall package even if you exclude the GPS and WiFi bells. Technology just does not work like that. And from what I understand from this forum, the AF cannot be worse than the 5DII. Yes, some people are upset about what is deemed to be only an "incremental" increae in ability, but then I come from a 500D and I am sure it will be huge. (One advantage of not upgrading every time)

So I am satisfied with my conclusion > 6D. For me it only lacks a built in flash which I will solve with a 270EXII when the 430EXII is to big.

Here is your problem - you really don't know what you are buying with a 6D if you preorder right now - and you sold your camera so you will need something soon.

6D looks good on paper and I agree with other posters that it is probably the best camera for your needs. BUT, since no one has tested the camera in depth it could also have some show-stopper issues for you. You can't know at this point. Plus if you pre-order you will pay top dollar for the camera. And the price will surely come down over time.

Here is what I suggest. Buy a 5DII - maybe even a used one - and keep it for 6 months. There are screaming deals on this camera right now. The prices on this shouldn't drop drastically over the next 6 months or so. After 6 months you can sell it for likely close to what you paid for it. Consider any difference the price of a 6 month rental. Now you will be in the position to make an informed decision, and you will likely be getting the 6D or 5DIII for a lower price. You might even like the 5DII and decide to keep it longer.

Given that none of us have the 6D, it's a bit of a stretch to figure which you should own. There are some professional features and video features that the 5D mark III has that the 6D does not. If you are more of a casual, hobby shooter which it looks like you are, you will not miss most of those. However, I do think the 6D is very limited for what it offers unless you really want wifi & gps. If not, I might even recommend the Nikon D600. It did a little better for me for landscape dynamic range. No one can pry my 5D mark III from my hands but I do think the D600 beats the 6D in that segment. I did a review between the 5Dmark III and D600:

You will need mostly new lenses anyway so switching systems isn't a problem. Like I said, I love the 5D mark III over anything Nikon offers, but I am really disappointed in the 6D specs and it probably won't beat the 5D mark III in quality so I doubt we will be blown away. Even the D600 beat the 5D3 in dynamic range which you need for landscapes. Nikon lets you push the shadows 3-4 stops with hardly any noise allowing HDR levels of dynamic range without shooting HDR. I wish my 5D3 allowed that. But I don't shoot landscapes so I prefer the 5D3.

Sorry for suggesting a Nikon on Canonrumers...but I am a Canon shooter and prefer canon, i'm just not a 6D fan yet. No dual cards, only 9af points, 1/180 sync speeds...stuff like that just makes me cringe. My 5D3 rocks though.